“Peace in Our Time!”

The P5+1 is a group of six world powers that joined forces in 2006 to try and contain or
stop Iran’s nuclear program. P5+1 refers to the UN Security Council's five permanent members (the P5); namely China,
France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; plus Germany.

On 14 July 2015, in Vienna, Austria, the P5+1 and Iran tentatively agreed – pending
ratification by the individual countries and the United Nations - on a treaty that supposedly constrains Iran
from developing nuclear weapons for a period of 10 years.

The more we learn about the proposed agreement between the P5+1 and Iran that was
announced in Vienna and the more we begin to understand the ramifications of this deal, the more it becomes
obvious that this is a very bad deal for just about everyone - except for Iran. It seems that the agreement was
largely fashioned by America’s president, Barack Obama and the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry. “The
White House wanted to sign a deal; Iran’s rulers wanted to ensure their path to the bomb and nuclear legitimacy.
Both got what they wanted. [Emphasis mine] The consequences will be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East,
more Iranian terrorism and subversion, and a greater likelihood of war.
“The Obama/Kerry willingness to concede anything for a nuclear deal with Iran has
been likened to Neville Chamberlain’s infamous Munich agreement with Adolph Hitler in 1938. [Emphasis
mine] . . .” (Ref. 1)

Ignoring the Facts and History

Our man in the White House has shown that he believes that his smile and his golden tongue
can solve any crisis and make friends out of even the most ruthless murderers and enemies of humanity. He ignores
advice from friends because he is convinced that only he perceives the truth and he is the only person that can
bring peace and tranquility to the world. He apparently is convinced that he can make the wolf to lie down with the
lamb. He smiles in a Cairo meeting of Middle East Arabs and expects global jihad to end; he believes his extended
open hand can end Iranian aspirations of establishing a global Islamic caliphate; he thought his meaningless
threats to Syria’s Assad could end the bloodshed there that has now cost over 200,000 Syrians their lives; he
insisted that by withdrawing American forces from Iraq, there would be peace and tranquility there; and he is sure
that all of Islam is peaceful and tolerant. Facts and 5,000 years of recorded history have no
meaning with this president because he knows it all. Everyone else and everything else be damned!

Babes in the Woods

The Obama administration has proven time and time again that they have not the
basic concept of how negotiations are conducted in the Middle Eastern Bazaar! On the other hand, the
rulers in Tehran are masters of the art of bazaar negotiations. “The most compelling argument the Obama
administration is offering to boost what it acknowledges is a compromise nuclear deal with Iran is this: It’s
better than the alternatives. {Not a very inspiring reason to make such a bad deal!}
“. . . How did we get ourselves into the situation where there are no good options?
“We did so by beginning the negotiations with three important concessions. First ,we took
the military option off the table. . . . Second, we took the current tough sanction regimen off the table by
acknowledging that, if we did not accept a deal, many of our most important partners would begin to reduce or
eliminate sanctions. Third, and most important, we took off the table the option of rejecting the deal by
publically acknowledging that if we do so, we will be worse off than if we accept even a questionable deal. .
. . {The president} led the Iranians to conclude we needed the deal more than they did.
“These three concessions left our negotiators with little leverage and provided their
Iranian counterparts with every incentive to demand more compromises from us. . . . {Also, President Obama
was so eager to make a deal that} ‘The deal itself became more important than what was in it.’ . . . - - -
“The reality is that there were always alternatives, though they became less realistic as
the negotiations progressed. We could have stuck to the original redlines – nonnegotiable demands – from the
beginning. These included on-the-spot inspections of all facilities rather than the nearly month-long notice
that will allow the Iranians to hide what they are doing; shutting down all facilities specifically designed for
nuclear weapons production; maintaining the embargo on missile and other sophisticated weapons rather than allowing
it to gradually be lifted; and most crucially, a written assurance that the international community will never
allow Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal. [Emphasis mine] . . .
“Instead, we caved early and often because the Iranians knew we desperately need{ed} a
deal to implement President Obama’s {naïve} world vision and to enhance his legacy.
“. . .We were playing checkers against the people who invented chess, and their
ayatollah checkmated our president. [Emphasis mine]
“But the real losers were those countries – our allies – who were not even allowed to
participate in the negotiations. Virtually every Middle Eastern leader, with the exception of Syria’s Assad,
opposes this deal. Nor do they feel bound by it, since they didn’t have a vote. The deal was imposed on
them, in much the same way the Chamberlain-Hitler deal was imposed on Czechoslovakia in 1938. [Emphasis
mine] . . .” (Ref. 2)

What the Agreement Doesn’t Address

The agreement with Iran fails to address several major issues of concern to the U.S. and
to other nations. “U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power said the nuclear deal doesn't change the United States'
‘profound concern about human rights violations committed by the Iranian government or about the instability Iran
fuels beyond its nuclear program, from its support for terrorist proxies to repeated threats against Israel to its
other destabilizing activities in the region. [Emphasis mine]’
“She urged Iran to release three ‘unjustly imprisoned’ Americans and to determine the
whereabouts of Robert Levinson, a former FBI agent who vanished in 2007.” (Ref.
3)

A Deal at Any Price

What has become obvious is that Barack Obama is a president so deeply ideological that he
simply can no longer see the world as it actually is. He is totally cluelessness with regard to reality and,
consequently, the Obama administration has proven itself just plain incompetent. Obama wanted a deal no matter what
compromises he had to make, no matter how much danger the deal represented to the countries in the Middle East and
particularly to Israel - ostensibly the US's most loyal ally in the region.

Throwing Our Friends Under the Bus

The President got a deal. At the same time, he got a deal that
threw a number of countries and peoples in the Middle East under the bus. The deal ignores Iran’s funding of the
Hamas terrorists in Gaza that have been attacking and killing Israelis and Egyptians. “Tehran in recent weeks has
been busy financing terrorism in the Gaza Strip and reaching out to the most radical jihadi elements based in the
Egyptian Sinai Peninsula . . .
“For the second consecutive month, Iran has transferred money to pay the salaries of
Hamas’s military wing, the Izz ad-Din al Qassam Brigades terrorist organization . . .” (Ref.
4)

The proposed agreement with Iran allows “the world’s foremost state sponsor of
international terror {to obtain} $150 billion with which to expand its reign of terror in a few short months, and
{to receive} a pass to obtain nuclear weapons in about 10 short years.” (Ref.
5)

The Iranian regime has clearly stated and acted on its desire to wipe Israel off the map
by providing potentially devastating and increasingly sophisticated, accurate and powerful missile technology to
Hezbollah in Lebanon. Its intentions were also apparent at a public rally calling for Israel's destruction just a
week before the announcement of the agreement with the P5+1. These very real dangers to America’s only democratic
ally in the region seem to have been totally ignored by the administration in its rush to arrive at an agreement –
any agreement - that would offer some hope of reducing or slowing Iran’s nuclear weapon-building program, even if
only temporarily.

Destabilizing the Middle East

“Even if all the countries concerned ratify the results of the P5+1 talks, the red flags
worrying most of the capitals in the Middle East will be flying as high as they were before the deal was signed.
There are four of them.” (Ref. 6)

First: The entire Middle East will race to go nuclear. The number-one concern with the way this
deal was structured was that it was bound to accelerate nuclear proliferation. Iran has violated its obligations
under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and repeatedly thumbed its nose at oversight from the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Yet it winds up getting a great deal under the agreement. Regional powers like Turkey,
Egypt and Saudi Arabia are likely to believe that the odds of Iran developing nuclear weapons are undiminished and
the penalty for their becoming nuclear breakout powers is plummeting, then the deterrent for them to also become
nuclear powers diminishes or disappears.[6]

Second: Tehran gets to keep its vast nuclear infrastructure and its ballistic missile program.
Other regional powers are likely to race to develop nuclear capabilities themselves, in part because the deal does
nothing to scuttle Iran’s plans to build a weapon. The administration’s pitch is that the deal slows down Iran’s
program, leaving plenty of time for “early warning” of a nuclear breakout. That’s cold comfort for Tehran’s
neighbors. What is scaring them is knowing that Iran will eventually put a nuclear warhead on a missile — and
this deal won’t stop that!!! Even if the administration does receive early warning (a dubious premise at
best), it has never indicated what — if anything — it would do about it. Indeed, these promises from Iran only
confirm the obvious: that the regime definitely has nuclear-weapons ambitions. After all, why have a massive
ballistic-missile program and secret military nuclear facilities if the plan isn’t to build nuclear weapons and
have the capability to deliver these weapons?[6]

Third: Sanctions relief will only make the region far less safe. People will argue the numbers, but
the sanctions relief and the renewed ability to sell more oil on the open market could wind up bringing $300-$400
billion into the Iranian economy. And who seriously doubts that money will be used to tighten the Mullahs’
tyrannical grip on the Iranian people and fund the most aggressive and destabilizing foreign policy outside of
ISIS? Essentially, the deal will pay for undermining U.S. policy and interests throughout the
region.[6]

Fourth: By design, the deal is temporary. Even the White House doesn’t claim it will
permanently keep Iran from getting an atomic bomb. So, what’s the point? And, after a couple of years of
cashing in on sanctions relief, Tehran might just walk away from the agreement - even before the agreement
expires.[6]

Iran, the Main State Sponsor of Terrorism

Money isn’t all that Iran supplies to Middle East terrorists. “An Egyptian security
official said that some Salafist terrorists captured in the Sinai Peninsula by Egypt in recent weeks admitted under
interrogations that Iranian agents initiated contact with their groups with an offer to supply weapons from Libya
and Sudan.” (Ref. 4)

In eastern Libya, a self-proclaimed jihadist Caliphate, strongly supported by Iran, is now
a springboard for Islamic terrorists into Africa and southern Europe. This radical Islamic entity includes takfiri
jihadists, the Muslim Brothers (Ikhwan), and many of the former Al Qaida movements. Starting early 2014, the
jihad-sponsoring states have capitalized on the building chaos in order to transform jihadist-held parts of Libya
into secure springboards for the spread of jihadism into both western Africa and southern
Europe.[7]

As early as 2011, Iran was involved in the Libyan chaos. “The on-site senior Iranian
operative was Ibrahim Muhammad Judaki of the Quds Forces contingent in Lebanon. His deputy was Khalil Harb, then
the Special Advisor to the Hizbullah’s Secretary General in charge of cooperation with and support for Palestinian,
Yemeni, and other sensitive groups. Another senior member of the Iranian group was Abdul Latif al-Ashkar, one of
the main logistics experts of the Hamas who was target killed by Israel near Port Sudan, Sudan, on the night of
April 6/7, 2011.
“The initial mission was to expedite the purchase of weapons and ammunition for all
anti-Western jihadist forces. The Iranians brought with them several millions in hard currency (dollars and euros).
Special attention was paid to the purchase of chemical warfare (CW) munitions for Hamas and Hizbullah.
“Tehran’s objective was to provide their protégés with CW capabilities from third-party
sources so that Iran would not be implicated and subjected to retaliation should Hamas or Hizbullah use these
weapons against Israel. . . .” (Ref. 7)

According to our own Department of State, Iran has been designated as a State
Sponsor of Terrorism since 1984. This is the party with which we are making an agreement. Since 1984,
“Iran continued its terrorist-related activity, including support for Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza, and
for Hizballah. It has also increased its presence in Africa and attempted to smuggle arms to Houthi separatists
in Yemen and Shia oppositionists in Bahrain. Iran used the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF)
and its regional proxy groups to implement foreign policy goals, provide cover for intelligence operations, and
create instability in the Middle East. The IRGC-QF is the regime’s primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting
terrorists abroad.
“Iran views Syria as a crucial causeway in its weapons supply route to Hizballah, its
primary beneficiary. In 2013, Iran continued to provide arms, financing, training, and the facilitation of Iraqi
Shia fighters to the Asad regime’s brutal crackdown, a crackdown that has resulted in the death of more than 100,000
civilians in Syria {now over 200,000} . . .
“Iran has historically provided weapons, training, and funding to Hamas and other
Palestinian terrorist groups, including the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), although Hamas’s ties to Tehran have been strained due to the Syrian civil
war. Since the end of the 2006 Israeli-Hizballah conflict, Iran has also assisted in rearming Hizballah,
in direct violation of UNSCR 1701. [Emphasis mine] Iran has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in
support of Hizballah in Lebanon and has trained thousands of its fighters at camps in Iran. These trained fighters
often use these skills in support of the Assad regime in Syria. - - -
“On January 23, 2013, Yemeni authorities seized an Iranian dhow, the Jihan, off the coast
of Yemen. The dhow was carrying sophisticated Chinese antiaircraft missiles, C-4 explosives, rocket-propelled
grenades, and a number of other weapons and explosives. The shipment of lethal aid was likely headed to Houthi
separatists in Northern Yemen. Iran actively supports members of the Houthi movement, including activities intended
to build military capabilities, which could pose a greater threat to security and stability in Yemen and the
surrounding region. {Houthi separatists backed by Iran have now totally destabilized Yemen, necessitating the
intervention of Saudi Arabia.}
“On December 29, 2013, the Bahraini Coast Guard interdicted a speedboat filled with
weapons and explosives that was likely bound for Shia oppositionists in Bahrain {and which was funded by Iran} . . .”
(Ref. 8)

A License to Continue Funding Terrorist Groups

The deal with Iran, gives the Mullahs in Tehran, more than $100 billion to use as they see
fit. History has shown that the use of financial resources by Iran has been to: sponsor global terrorism; fund
Hezbollah and Hamas in their ongoing attacks against Israel and Israeli civilians; support Bashar Assad’s fight to
stay in power that has cost over 200,000 Syrians their lives and forced millions more to become refugees; fund and
arm the Houthis in Yemen who have instituted a civil war there; call for the destruction of Israel and the murder of
all its Jewish population; and ongoing attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction coupled with an
intercontinental ballistic missile system that would threaten nations throughout the world - including its
arch-enemy, the United States. Is there any doubt that Iran will continue on this path? Since the Islamic
fundamentalists took control of Iran some 3-1/2 decades ago, has Iran shown any indication of moderating its
aspirations of attaining Islamic global supremacy? Why should we think that they will change now, in ten years
or in fifteen years? The religious fanatics in control of Iran believe they have won another battle against the
godless infidels. Their time horizon is not five or ten years, their time horizon is as long as it takes to defeat
the enemy. To their way of thinking, the deal they have agreed to is just one more step on the path to ultimate
victory. In any event, to true believers, any agreement can be broken whenever it serves their purpose. According
to their interpretation of the Koran, all agreements with non-believers are non-binding. For the true believer, it
is perfectly acceptable to lie and deceive infidels like Jews, Christians and the Great Satan. Making concessions
to these Islamic extremists is futile and only reinforces their belief that they can always get more and more until
they achieve their ultimate goal – the one global united Islamic Caliphate – in this case a Caliphate centered in
Tehran and under the total control of the mullahs. Tehran has a long history of misleading the world and there is no
reason to now trust Iran to adhere to the proposed agreement.

What the Agreement Does and Doesn’t Do

The agreement does not require “anywhere, anytime” inspections. Instead, there can be at
least a 24-day interval before inspections can take place. What will the Iranians be doing during that 24-day period
of time?

The agreement calls for the lifting of the arms embargo against Iran within five years,
and the lifting of the embargo on missile sales within eight years. But Iran will have access to between $100 and
$150 billion in unfrozen assets and there will be no transparency to ensure that this money does not get funneled
into Iran’s financing of global terrorism, especially murderous terrorism directed at Israel.

A Poisonous Snake Can’t Change its Ways

For more than three decades, the religious zealots in Tehran have ranted and raved about
the “Great Satan” – America. We are Iran’s chief enemy - maybe even more so than Israel!
Witness the burning of American and Israeli flags during Tehran's Quds Day on July 10, 2015.

So what exactly is it that the Obama administration thinks has changed about this
totalitarian regime? Where is there a shred of evidence that the rulers of Iran have moderated their ways? Just when
has Washington discovered that the fanatics have stopped yelling “Death to America” or stopped screaming for the
end of the State of Israel? Why should anyone in his right mind trust these Islamic extremists to honor any
agreement or deviate in the slightest from their warped vision of global Islamic supremacy?

We Had Other Options

Our president insists that there are only two choices: this deal or war. But the
choices need not be that limited, nor that simple. In June of 1967, Israel destroyed Iraq’s nuclear
development facility 10.5 miles southeast of Baghdad (Operation Opera) – war did not result, but Iraq’s
nuclear development program ended! In September of 2007, Israel bombed Syria’s nuclear development
facility at Deir ez-Zor (Operation Orchard) – war did not result, but Syria’s nuclear development program
ended!

The deal between the P5+1 and Iran is not the antidote to war. Rather, it makes increased
conflict in the Middle East even more likely, as a newly enriched and emboldened Iran increases its destabilizing
activities throughout the region and its threatened neighbors pursue more extreme measures for self-preservation.
Sadly, the Obama administration is so focused on a “negotiations above all” foreign-policy model, that it won’t or
can’t consider alternatives that would force the Iranian regime into abandoning its bad
behavior.[6]

The Iranian regime that we are dealing with consists of Shiite Islamists who interpret
their faith as a code of governance. This ideology holds that Muslims are required by Allah to wage global jihad
until a messianic figure called the Mahdi appears to bring about final victory over Islam’s non-Muslim enemies.
i.e., you, I and everyone else on this earth who won’t bow down to these Islamic extremists. Their interpretation
of their holy book, the Koran, gives them license to murder, cheat, lie or do anything else they deem necessary to
achieve their final victory. Iran’s unshakeable commitment to jihad is stated in the preamble of its
constitution. It states that the government is committed to “the establishment of a universal holy government
and the downfall of all others.”[9]

America Chose Not to Lead

Very unfortunately, whether or not the United States approves the deal with Iran is largely
irrelevant. The United Nations is ultimately the body that endorses and enforces the agreement. And so, on 20 July
2015, “The U.N. Security Council . . . unanimously endorsed the landmark nuclear deal between Iran and six world
powers and authorized a series of measures leading to the end of U.N. sanctions that have hurt Iran's economy.
{So much for an extensive and meaningful review of all the provisions and implications embodied in the
agreement. The U.S. Congress will at least take 60 days to review the agreement.}
“The resolution had been agreed to by the five veto-wielding council members, who along
with Germany negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran. It was co-sponsored by all 15 members of the Security
Council. - - -
“. . . Iran's nuclear program will be curbed for a decade in exchange for potentially
hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of relief from international sanctions. Many key penalties on the Iranian
economy, such as those related to the energy and financial sectors, could be lifted by the end of the year.
“The document specifies that seven resolutions related to U.N. sanctions will be terminated
when Iran has completed a series of major steps to curb its nuclear program and the International Atomic Energy
Agency has concluded that ‘all nuclear material in Iran remains in peaceful activities.’
“All provisions of the U.N. resolution will terminate in 10 years, including the snap back
provision.” (Ref. 3)

What Happens after the Deal is Signed?

So the deal - good or bad - gets signed, then what? According to President Obama,
“The deal is not contingent on Iran changing its behavior.” and “It solves one particular
problem, which is making sure they don’t have a bomb.” (Ref.
10) So the president is telling us that the deal allows Iran to continue its bad behavior
of threatening to destroy Israel, of spreading turmoil throughout the Middle East and Africa, of threatening death
to America, and of continuing to be the main sponsor of state terrorism. As to making sure that they don’t have a
bomb, at best that assurance is only good for 10 years, and then, only if Iran honors the agreement. Past history
predicts that there is very little chance of Iran sticking to its promises.

President Obama had no plan to stop President Assad of Syria in his use of poison gas, he
had no plan on how to defeat ISIS in Syria and Iraq; he had no plan on how to stop ISIS and al Qaida from
destabilizing Iraq; he had no plan on how to stop the Taliban from regaining control in Afghanistan; he had no
plan for defeating the Houthi rebels in Yemen; he had no plan for stopping the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt;
and now, he has no plan for containing a post-deal Iran.

Death to the Infidels

Fact: The fanatics in power in Iran do not play by the same rules we do. In fact, they obey only one
rule – Conquer the world! Are we willing to put our faith in any agreement with such
people?